On September 8, 2025, the legal world of England and Wales was rocked by the publication of a searing independent review led by Harriet Harman KC, which exposed deep-rooted problems of bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment within the Bar. The 128-page report, the result of months of investigation, didn’t mince words: it concluded that the Bar, long held to the highest ethical standards, has allowed a “culture of impunity” to fester, particularly for those in positions of power.
Harman, a highly respected barrister and the former deputy leader of the Labour Party, pulled no punches in her assessment. "Those who are called to the Bar are called to more than legal competence. They are called to the highest of ethical standards… respect for the rule of law depends on it. But when it comes to bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment, the Bar does not always uphold those standards," she wrote, according to City A.M. The review’s findings have sent ripples throughout the legal community, forcing a reckoning with uncomfortable truths that many say have been swept under the rug for far too long.
The report’s most damning revelation is the existence of a "culture of impunity for those at the top who commit misconduct." Harman explained, "Those in powerful positions, whether at the Bar or in the judiciary, who choose to engage in bullying, harassment or sexual harassment can be pretty confident that nothing will be done about it. And that is what must change. The jeopardy must change from the victim to the perpetrator." This statement, echoed in Personnel Today, captures the heart of the problem: victims feel unable to complain, fearing retaliation or indifference, while perpetrators—often senior figures—act with near-total impunity.
The review lays bare the extent of judicial bullying, particularly within criminal practice. According to Harman’s findings, judges are frequently responsible for bullying barristers, with incidents ranging from shouting and belittling to displays of uncontrolled anger in open court. The judiciary, the report claims, is afflicted by a "culture of denial," refusing to acknowledge that bullying by judges is a serious and persistent problem. The impact on barristers, especially those early in their careers, is profound and damaging.
Sexual harassment is another persistent blight, with aspiring and junior barristers—often those least able to defend themselves—bearing the brunt. Harman’s report revealed that student barristers routinely use WhatsApp groups to warn each other about predatory barristers. "It must be understood by all in chambers that pupils and junior clerks are there to work, not for the sexual gratification of their seniors," Harman wrote, as quoted in City A.M. The examples given range from unwanted physical contact, such as groping at social events, to inappropriate sexual comments and outright propositions.
The case of Jo Sidhu KC, former chair of the Criminal Bar Association and vice chair of the Bar Council’s equality and diversity committee, looms large in Harman’s review. Sidhu was disbarred on March 19, 2025, following a Bar Standards Board (BSB) tribunal in December 2024 that found he had engaged in professional misconduct involving inappropriate sexual activity with a young female barrister. While Sidhu denied all charges and an appeal is pending, the case has become emblematic of the systemic issues plaguing the Bar. Harman’s report noted, "The case against Navjot (‘Jo’) Sidhu KC, who was disbarred in March, highlights some of the ‘systemic issues facing the Bar with regard to sexual misconduct’."
Despite the severity of these issues, the Bar’s existing rules have been woefully inadequate. There is, astonishingly, no explicit provision in the Bar’s handbook specifically prohibiting sexual misconduct. This regulatory gap, Harman argues, has contributed to the current crisis. The review calls for decisive and radical change, recommending a total of 36 reforms designed to overhaul the profession’s culture and enforcement mechanisms.
Among the most significant recommendations is a ban on sexual relationships between barristers and aspiring barristers, juniors, or employees. Harman proposes that any such relationship should be classified as "serious misconduct"—an offense that could trigger career-limiting or even career-ending sanctions. She also calls for the BSB to clearly define sexual harassment and to prohibit the abuse of trust and power, even in private relationships, if a professional connection exists or has existed. Notably, Harman insists that it should be "serious misconduct to trawl for sex on LinkedIn."
The recommendations extend well beyond sexual misconduct. Harman urges the BSB to clarify its code of conduct, mandate anti-harassment and anti-bullying policies and training, and improve the handling of complaints. There should be a duty to report serious misconduct—with exemptions for victims and their confidants—and sanctions for failing to report when there is "reasonable suspicion." The review also suggests new protocols for data-sharing when concerns about an individual arise.
One of the report’s most troubling findings is the difficulty chambers face in disciplining senior or influential members. Chambers, collectives of self-employed barristers, are not legal entities and often lack HR expertise—especially the smaller ones. As one barrister told the review, "Complaints can be raised within chambers; however, most chambers do not have specialist HR staff, and in any event, it is very hard for chambers to take internal disciplinary action satisfactorily." The options, the barrister said, often come down to ignoring the issue, having a "quiet word," or, in rare cases, expelling an individual—actions that are rarely taken against high-earning or well-connected members.
The Bar’s regulators and representative bodies have responded to Harman’s report with a mixture of candor and resolve. Mark Neale, director general of the BSB, acknowledged, "The report shows that the Bar must act now to make the culture change necessary to address bullying, discrimination and harassment. It’s unacceptable that the profession lacks a supportive and safe environment for all barristers and pupils." Neale committed to implementing changes and consulting further to improve enforcement, stating, "We will now fully review the findings and recommendations and work with the profession and other stakeholders to help improve the culture at the Bar."
Barbara Mills KC, chair of the Bar Council, echoed these sentiments: "There is no place for bullying and harassment at the Bar. We’re aware of the scale of the problem, but seeing its impact on our colleagues and those aspiring to join the profession in this report makes for uncomfortable reading. It is clear from the review that decisive action is required."
The Law Society, too, has signaled its support for sweeping change. Mark Evans, vice president of the Law Society, commented, "A sector-wide effort, and we are committed to working collaboratively to drive real change." The message from the top is clear: the time for quiet words and half-measures is over.
For many barristers, especially those just entering the profession, Harman’s report is both a stark warning and a glimmer of hope. The recommendations, if fully implemented, could mark a watershed moment for the Bar, signaling a new era of accountability and respect. But as the legal community absorbs the report’s findings, the real test will be whether its words lead to lasting change—or whether, as has so often happened in the past, the old culture proves too resilient to uproot.
